Or Google Apps. (Same thing? Docs in Apps is Docs?)
The editor could park himself in there, others submitting in oo or mso
as they wish.
Warning - Google Apps is lowest common denominator of the two. Not
sure that changes / edits / versions would carry through back and
forth. Haven't tried.
If the editor is only reviewing, not editing or marking up, perhaps
pdf really is the way to go.
For PDF - http://www.pdfdownload.org/.
Khalid Baheyeldin wrote, On 01/11/2010 4:41 PM:
> Try collaborating using Google Documents. It works well as long as
> the number of people involved is quite low.
>> Once you are done, export to .doc for the Windows guy/gal, and then
> .odf for you and the other author. This is not a closed cloud, it
> is open.
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Robert P. J. Day
> <rpjday at crashcourse.ca <mailto:rpjday at crashcourse.ca>> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, john at netdirect.ca <mailto:john at netdirect.ca>
>>kwlug-disc-bounces at kwlug.org>>> From: "Robert P. J. Day"
>>>>>> i just heard back and the other editor now admits that, yes,
>>> the changes are visible. i still have no idea what the problem
>>> is, since i don't run word and can't reproduce what he's
>>> seeing. but if he now suggests that things are good, i'll
>>> leave it at that.
>>>> I suspect you are editing open source related articles? Why not
>> suggest they use an Open Source tool, like Open Office?
>> i wish. the author is using OO, as am i, but all content has to go
> through the publisher's project editor, who uses word. he's
> responsible for numerous ongoing projects -- some OSS, some not --
> and it's extremely unlikely he's going to change tools at this
> point.